A very interesting (and concerning) report was broadcast tonight on 60 Minutes about railroad accidents and the consequences from delayed implementation of PTC. Those who didn't see it should check it out.
Original Post
Replies sorted oldest to newest
I’ll say the same thing here I said on the other CBS/PTC thread. The 60 Minutes piece was a one sided hack job and I sent CBS a message to that effect.
Curt
It is all narrative and talking points - even the Feds can't get it to operate properly. They are not even sure how to get it to work. No standards, no procedures, no commonality.
But, it sure sounds good in utopia.
I know, it was on 60 minutes, so it must be true.
What happened to Amtrak in Phila? North Carolina? California?
Put stuff like this on Facebook where it belongs.
PTC may work in some instances but not on others. In the case of the NC collision, workers left a switch open that led to a siding with a parked train. Once the train switched off the mainline and headed towards the parked train there was little time to react. Would PTC have prevented this?
Dennis LaGrua posted:PTC may work in some instances but not on others. In the case of the NC collision, workers left a switch open that led to a siding with a parked train. Once the train switched off the mainline and headed towards the parked train there was little time to react. Would PTC have prevented this?
Absolutely YES!!!! In fact, the signal system on that CSX line would have prevented that accident, had it not be shutdown for implementation of PTC.
Hot Water posted:Dennis LaGrua posted:PTC may work in some instances but not on others. In the case of the NC collision, workers left a switch open that led to a siding with a parked train. Once the train switched off the mainline and headed towards the parked train there was little time to react. Would PTC have prevented this?
Absolutely YES!!!! In fact, the signal system on that CSX line would have prevented that accident, had it not be shutdown for implementation of PTC.
I wonder why the Amtrak train was moving at more than "restricted" speed while the signal system was down?
Hot Water posted:Absolutely YES!!!! In fact, the signal system on that CSX line would have prevented that accident, had it not be shutdown for implementation of PTC.
And this was another fact that CBS conveniently decided to ignore as well.
Curt
Big Jim posted:Hot Water posted:Dennis LaGrua posted:PTC may work in some instances but not on others. In the case of the NC collision, workers left a switch open that led to a siding with a parked train. Once the train switched off the mainline and headed towards the parked train there was little time to react. Would PTC have prevented this?
Absolutely YES!!!! In fact, the signal system on that CSX line would have prevented that accident, had it not be shutdown for implementation of PTC.
I wonder why the Amtrak train was moving at more than "restricted" speed while the signal system was down?
It was a planned shut-down of the signal system, and all trains in that territory were operating under Track Warrant (or whatever CSX refers to it). Prior to entering the territory without signals, the Amtrak Conductor was instructed to relocate from the train to the locomotive cab, in order to copy any and all Track Warrants. The train speed was thus limited 60 MPH (or maybe it was 50 MPH) while traveling through that territory. As a result of the misaligned turnout, both the Amtrak Engineer and Conductor were killed upon impact.
That business owner they interviewed, stating the tracks were in poor shape was a real winner also. No clue what so ever
Interestingly, I've heard a new automated announcement on my Metra commute - 'we are delayed due to issues with positive train control.' It is being tweaked - and according to my favorite conductors - is fairly 'buggy' in so far as how its speed control and (for lack of a better phrase) block control works.
I just got off the meteor yesterday. The engineer of the freight train that was fired was partially to blame. He should have re-checked the switch. Why did he have to ask the conductor 5 times if he turned it back?
juniata guy posted:I’ll say the same thing here I said on the other CBS/PTC thread. The 60 Minutes piece was a one sided hack job and I sent CBS a message to that effect.
Curt
Good for you, Curt. I stopped watching that program years ago.
johnstrains posted:juniata guy posted:I’ll say the same thing here I said on the other CBS/PTC thread. The 60 Minutes piece was a one sided hack job and I sent CBS a message to that effect.
Curt
Good for you, Curt. I stopped watching that program years ago.
I stopped watching Dateline many moons ago on a chop job they did on TCAS in regards to aviation. No more 60 mins for me due to this disgrace.
Big Jim posted:I wonder why the Amtrak train was moving at more than "restricted" speed while the signal system was down?Apparently when CTC is out of service, the method of moving train reverts back to written track permits with a max speed of 50 per. . This is a bad rule, Apparently if CTC rules remained there would be too many delays.
Yes we know when we can't get a permissive signal in CTC territory ,we get written permission to pass a stop signal. In this scenario we move at restricted speed (in no case exceeding 15 per)
My problems with the 60 Minutes report;
- Leslie Stahl did not talk about the difficulty in developing the PTC technology. It did not exist at all prior to the Chatsworth wreck. It had to be developed from scratch. That was the main reason for the delays and extensions.
- The electrical contractor, whose business is adjacent to the CSX tracks, said track condition was “horrible”. What qualifies him to make that judgment?
- They made the statement that only 10% of the required track miles are in PTC compliance. I think that figure is low. I thought BNSF was in total compliance also, many commuter agencies are in compliance.
- One of the causes of the Silver Meteor wreck was the CTC being off-line in order to install the PTC, So the cure became worse that the illness, at least, in this case.
- The diabolical "secret" agreement for Amtrak to indemnify the host railroad for any and all wrecks was not a secret. I have known about it for years and I am an outsider.
George
Hot Water posted:Big Jim posted:Hot Water posted:Dennis LaGrua posted:PTC may work in some instances but not on others. In the case of the NC collision, workers left a switch open that led to a siding with a parked train. Once the train switched off the mainline and headed towards the parked train there was little time to react. Would PTC have prevented this?
Absolutely YES!!!! In fact, the signal system on that CSX line would have prevented that accident, had it not be shutdown for implementation of PTC.
I wonder why the Amtrak train was moving at more than "restricted" speed while the signal system was down?
It was a planned shut-down of the signal system, and all trains in that territory were operating under Track Warrant (or whatever CSX refers to it).
Ah yes, I remember now...the dreaded Track Warrant!
They're called signal suspensions on CSX. Usually happens when interlockings are upgraded/changed or entire stretches of railroad are resignaled. You are given an EC1, which is your paper authority, you may not exceed 49 mph, and you need an absolute signal INTO the suspension and an absolute signal OUT of the suspension. Everything else in between the limits doesn't count.
If they made everyone do restricted speed during a suspension, everyone would outlaw. They've done 10 and 15 mile stretches at a time...that's a lot of switches to check and blind curves to creep around.
For as long as I've been working, they've treated signal suspension very seriously. There are special bulletins you must carry, and everyone gets a job briefing in the yard office before getting on the train. The train dispatcher also briefs over the rules. They provide us a map of the suspension too, also with the relevant rules written on the back of it.
The craziest suspension I had to operated through was at the north end of our yard. That area is also the meeting point between two operating divisions with two different dispatchers. And of course, we had to pick-up and set-out. I had to get an EC-1 from the first dispatcher, a signal in, and an EC-1 from the second dispatcher. Go back to the road channel and talk my way into two adjoining work authorities, then make our moves. I then had to give up our EC-1s to both dispatchers when we cleared back into the yard before our final pull, then get two NEW EC-1s to leave, get a signal out, go back to the road again, call both work authorities for permission again....
A lot to think about, and be mindful of while trying to get a train out of the yard. I am confident enough in the ability of my duties that I was sure that if I took my time, and acted carefully that there would be no issue getting out of the yard in these conditions. The cynic in me also wondered why it was just so **** important this mixed freight do all this work and get out of time exactly when they wanted to take the signal system down to add some new absolutes. Because if just one step was missed, they would have no problem charging me and my conductor and holding us out of service to find us guilty in investigation. It wouldn't matter WHY a step was missed (the perfect storm of distractions in this scenario was quite high), but just simply whether or not a rule was violated. If I had my EC-1, but not the pot signal, I would have blown an absolute stop. Or if I had my EC-1 and signal, but not one of the work authorities, I would have violated main track authority and potentially endangered mow workers. Or if I did all of those things but forgot to isolate the third engine while shoving back and we popped a wheel off the rail....improper train handling.
Sometimes there's only 2 things to worry about, other times there are 50.
I was reading a book about the SSW/SP BLUE STREAK MERCHANDISE. Thete was a section in Central Texas where there were no block signals. SP wanted to run the train at 70, not 49 mph max. They did it by setting up a special block between two train order stations. Only the BSM could move between the two TO locations. It worked. No accidents. But to me everybody had to be on the right page while this special order was up.
I doubt this type of operation could happen today.
I ride Metrolink when i work downtown and I've seen four malfunctions of PTC -- stopped the train without speeding or running a signal (twice after moving about 150 feet along the platform at LAUPT). We had to sit for five minutes while the computer re-booted. While I like the idea in principle (the Chatsworth crash was engineer error), computer-controlled safety systems are still subject to malfunction. I've worked with computers for over 40 years and I still trust them as far as I can throw an AC4400.
"If they made everyone do restricted speed during a suspension, everyone would outlaw."
Sometimes in the interest of SAFETY that needs to be done!
Remember "Safety is of first importance in the discharge of duty."
They're called signal suspensions on CSX. Usually happens when interlockings are upgraded/changed or entire stretches of railroad are resignaled. You are given an EC1, which is your paper authority, you may not exceed 49 mph, and you need an absolute signal INTO the suspension and an absolute signal OUT of the suspension. Everything else in between the limits doesn't count.
You lost me on this one.....What's an absolute signal? Is it the beginning and ending of a track warrant location?
Dominic Mazoch posted:I was reading a book about the SSW/SP BLUE STREAK MERCHANDISE. There was a section in Central Texas where there were no block signals. SP wanted to run the train at 70, not 49 mph max. They did it by setting up a special block between two train order stations. Only the BSM could move between the two TO locations. It worked. No accidents. But to me everybody had to be on the right page while this special order was up.
I doubt this type of operation could happen today.
It could!
And, it did!
I have done this twice during adverse weather conditions. It is called "Absolute Block".
Back then, under orders from our Superintendent, MoW and Supervisory personnel went out and spiked ALL switches to mainline movement. A supervisor was located at each end of the absolute block territory. One train at a time was allowed to move through the block at track speed. The supervisor at the end of the block notified the dispatcher when the train had cleared the block in order to allow another train through.
Sure, it may have taken some time, but, there were ZERO accidents and the freight moved...at least on our division!
Other division superintendents didn't do this and the main line from Roanoke to Norfolk was at a STANDSTILL!
The problem with systems like PTC , like any regulatory derived system, is often they come about after something bad has happened and because of that, rather than a rational development program with clearly defined standards, you end up with something cobbled together, with regulations not entirely thought out and technology not necessarily well thought out or tested. Having been through 2 major meltdowns in the financial world, in 1987 and 2008, regulators often come up with knee jerk reactions to problems (while the industry, instead of wondering why someone laid an egg, do everything they can to deny the problems that caused the issue), then mandate rules and regulations that don't really fix the original problem, and also end up being a nightmare to implement, don't really do what they wanted, and end up being either dropped, or worse, are found out to make things worse. To make it worse, those regulated don't really want to do it, so they try and find every way out of it they can.....or take a look at the NYC subway system, when in response to accidents that happened where trains rear ended another train (with fatalities in at least one case),they put in rules that relied on the signal system to report when trains were too close together, with penalties for the motormen, then they figured out the signal system is so fouled up it doesn't record the following distances very well, so motormen end up being so cautious it causes all kinds of delays, because the idiots running the MTA didn't even know the signal system was inaccurate.
If PTC is done right it should make trains operate more efficiently, it will mean more trains can use a given section of track, it should mean less accidents, less loss, you name it. But that also means having a system that a)itself is robust enough not to break down and tested long and well enough to prove it is resilient and does what we want and b)that there are well defined rules to handle when a system does break down, which all will from time to time, or extraordinary situations happen. I have worked on systems that controlled significant portions of trading on major financial markets over the years, and we had all kinds of contingencies planned out if problems happen, all kinds of operational procedures, etc.
PTC is basically experiencing growing pains and (to my eyes, for whatever that is worth) also may not have been well thought out necessarily. I do suspect that both private railroads and even things like state run transit agencies have dragged their feet on this, private rail roads are loathe to spend money on things they consider non revenue generating and don't exactly give them priority (and they also know that often when it comes to regulatory deadlines, that in general they often get extensions, especially if they threaten lawsuits), state agencies because they already are strapped for funding (NJ transit has severe shortages of train crews, thanks to what a prior administration did with transit funding, and also had the PTC mandate to deal with, with limited funds).
Media sources sell ratings on blowing things up, the same way that certain quarters are out to get PTC outside the media (for example, blaming a train crash that happened when the signal system was down to allow PTC to be installed, blaming that new fangled PTC, rather than either someone not following the proper procedure or proper procedure not being in place when signal systems are down; signal systems do need maintainance, upgrades happen with traditional systems, breakdowns happen).
Some folks here have poked at problems with PTC, some have poked at 60 Minutes (shoot the messenger), some have given excuses why the railroads aren't to be blamed for the PTC delay, for a multitude of reasons. But when the Chairman of the National Transportation Safety Board indicates that he's perplexed, even shocked by the delays that have occurred in implementation of PTC, and believes PTC is a good thing which has been delayed too long, I tend to listen to him.
breezinup posted:Some folks here have poked at problems with PTC, some have poked at 60 Minutes (shoot the messenger), some have given excuses why the railroads aren't to be blamed for the PTC delay, for a multitude of reasons. But when the Chairman of the National Transportation Safety Board indicates that he's perplexed, even shocked by the delays that have occurred in implementation of PTC, and believes PTC is a good thing which has been delayed too long, I tend to listen to him.
Just remember that he is just anther government appointee. The NTSB has generally been at odds with both the Federal Aviation Administration as well as the Federal Railroad Administration, over the last many, many years.
Gregg posted:
You lost me on this one.....What's an absolute signal? Is it the beginning and ending of a track warrant location?
An absolute is a signal that "stop" is the most restrictive aspect it can display, and doesn't have a numberplate like an intermediate does.
I also forgot to mention they'll have switch tenders at the interlockings to line trains from track to track, but what has happened before is that since switch tender positions are called off the conductor's extralist, they blow the entire list trying to find people to stand a every interlocking...so usually every attempt is made to straight-rail the railroad through the suspension limits. Before approaching interlockings that switchtenders are present at, we have to call the switchtender to confirm the position of the switch.
breezinup posted:. But when the Chairman of the National Transportation Safety Board indicates that he's perplexed, even shocked by the delays that have occurred in implementation of PTC, and believes PTC is a good thing which has been delayed too long, I tend to listen to him.
Not sure of the logic behind that - Jolene Molitoris was an FRA administrator and she knew less about trains than the most green member of this toy train forum.
To me, the important takeaway from this is that CBS 60 Minutes broadcast an inaccurate show about PTC, and everyone who watched and is not a railroader or informed railfan was misinformed. The damage is already done. Some of those well-meaning but misinformed people will write to their Senators and Congressmen, most of whom don't understand this subject either, and, oh, well, we'll get through it some way.
I'm going to drink a cold beer and go to bed.
Rule292 posted:breezinup posted:. But when the Chairman of the National Transportation Safety Board indicates that he's perplexed, even shocked by the delays that have occurred in implementation of PTC, and believes PTC is a good thing which has been delayed too long, I tend to listen to him.
Not sure of the logic behind that - Jolene Molitoris was an FRA administrator and she knew less about trains than the most green member of this toy train forum.
Well, I guess she's been around trains for awhile. She serves as president of the U.S. Railcar Company, which manufactures passenger cars and DMUs, and in 1999 Railway Age named her as one of 16 great 20th Century Railroaders. I don't know how much that all means, but it may mean that she knows more about trains than the most green member of this forum. 
On Monday, Railway Age published an interesting piece about industry non-participation in this report:
"In trying times, wise railroaders shouldn't clam up."
I hired as a Conductor/Trainman on the Penn Central in 1974. Went on to subsequently work for Conrail then to New Jersey Transit until I resigned all together in 1987. During my 13 years polishing the rails I worked yard service drilling freight and passenger cars. I collected tickets, on the road, between NY Penn Station and Union Station in Washington DC and also down the North Jersey Coast to Bayhead Junction. I handled PC, Amtrak, Conrail and NJT equipment. I rode in the engines and the hacks until Prince Reagan did away with them.
During that entire time I can't recall any of my engineman throwing a single switch.
Just sayin'
Ponz
For those of you who are interested, there is an excellent article on the Railway Age website about the 60 Minutes program written by their editor-in-chief. Sorry I do not have the computer skills needed to post a link.
tncentrr posted:For those of you who are interested, there is an excellent article on the Railway Age website about the 60 Minutes program written by their editor-in-chief. Sorry I do not have the computer skills needed to post a link.
It's been posted above.
jay jay posted:On Monday, Railway Age published an interesting piece about industry non-participation in this report:
"In trying times, wise railroaders shouldn't clam up."
I'm watched the 60 Minutes segment this morning, and that stood out to me …. why did the FRA refuse to go on the record. Not wise, it only makes people wonder.
As whenever the Post or Times' investigators uncover something, they go to the involved parties before publication to give them a chance to include their responses. When they refuse …. it only makes their situation worse in the eyes of the public.
jay jay posted:On Monday, Railway Age published an interesting piece about industry non-participation in this report:
"In trying times, wise railroaders shouldn't clam up."
Thanks for posting this, it gave a pretty good overview of a complex situation. Among other things, it points out that PTC itself is designed to prevent only certain kinds of problems, and that it is very easy to assume something is a miracle technology that will cure all problems. Whether the AAR number is correct (that only 4% of accidents that happen would be helped by PTC) or understated, the reality is that PTC is designed for specific kinds of problems, like trains running into each other. I also agree that with something like this, that the industry should be responding, they have every right to ask 60 Minutes for the right to respond to the show and point out the errors, and should.
This kind of thing is nothing new,and despite rants I have heard other places, it isn't really about bias, it is about selling a product to their audience, programs like 60 minutes and their ilk across the spectrum of viewpoints are out to get audience and sensationalize things, that is their game, and always has been, especially since the time when news became part of the entertainment part of media businesses, I don't care if it is broadcast news, cable news in its various forms or internet media 'news' services, sensationalism sells, not hard news. 60 Minutes is selling the view of greedy corporations and inept government in their pocket, other outlets sell the idea of unneeded regulation , etc, etc (When I think of things like this, I think of the great "Point/Counterpoint" takeoff in the movie "Airplane").
I hope that the industry does set the record straight, if as this appears this piece was inaccurate, they should ask for a chance to respond, shows often have a time when they broadcast responses and updates to pieces they have run. About the only good coming out of a piece like this might be that those who are in reality fighting PTC, or trying to sabotage it, think twice about that, because I think PTC does have value, from what I know of it, like the air brake and the knuckle coupler, it not only will make trains safer, but also will make them operate more efficiently if it does what I think it can do (I read a case study years ago, after air brakes and the knuckle coupler became mandatory, railroad executives were 'astonished' that there was a huge ROI on the money spent implementing both features.......).
I'm astonished with all the 60 minutes bashing. My guess is that most of the bashers adhere to Faux News
Ponz
Ponz posted:I'm astonished with all the 60 minutes bashing. My guess is that most of the bashers adhere to Faux News
Ponz
Really
Guess facts in this matter don't matter to you.
Ponz posted:I'm astonished with all the 60 minutes bashing. My guess is that most of the bashers adhere to Faux News
Ponz
No. As a result of what has been happening throughout most of the "main stream" TV news, I rarely watch most of it, especially those intelligence insulting "news magazines". The bashing of that 60 minutes segment is a result of those of us knowledgable of the industry, and what a poor job was done by the producer/producers of that segment.
Ponz posted:I'm astonished with all the 60 minutes bashing. My guess is that most of the bashers adhere to Faux News
Ponz
You are ill-informed. Your "guess" is simply that.
Guess again.
